In his e-book, “An Inconvenient Deception,” Spencer, who is a research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, exposes the “bad science, bad policy and some outright falsehoods” in the sequel to Gore’s 2006 “An Inconvenient Truth.”

According to The Washington Times, Gore’s latest film has failed to gain traction despite an aggressive promotion campaign.

And it’s not just moviegoers who aren’t showing interest. Readers also appear to be looking for a counterbalance to Gore’s climate rhetoric as The Daily Caller reports:

The e-book published to accompany Gore’s film is ranked #51,031 for purchases in the Kindle Store, according to Amazon.com. Spencer’s book is ranked #1,201 for Kindle Store purchases.

Spencer earned his M.S. and Ph.D. in meteorology from the University of Wisconsin-Madison and has been awarded the NASA Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal. Spencer is also the Team Leader for NASA’s Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer (AMSR-E) on the Aqua satellite.

As an authority on climate studies, Spencer explains the problems with Gore’s argument:

It’s wrong because everything Gore shows in the new movie happens naturally…

…Sea level has been rising steadily at about 1 inch per decade for over 150 years, long before CO2 emissions could be blamed…

…For instance, melting on the Greenland ice sheet. That happens every summer, but he makes it sound like it’s due to us. Rising sea level in Miami Beach. That is partly natural and it’s partly because Miami Beach was built on reclaimed swampland, which is sinking just as fast as sea level has been rising for the last 150 years.

Just weeks before the film’s release, Gore updated “An Inconvenient Sequel” to criticize President Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement. He said, “Removing the United States from the Paris Agreement is a reckless and indefensible action.”

Unfortunately, many corporations blindly take the same position as Gore, who is not a qualified scientist, on the Paris Climate Agreement and continue to support the deal which has been criticized for its long-term economic costs and lack of meaningful enforcement mechanism. Read our post here on the companies like Bank of America, Walt Disney, and more that support the environmental activism embodied by the Paris Agreement even as qualified scientists like Spencer debunk these arguments.